Disappointing performance

[Goober]

I've just put together an Athlon XP 3000+ system for a family member. I was
disappointed at the CPU and memory performance compared to my own Pentium 4
2.6-GHz (400-Mhz FSB) system. I thought that the Athlon XP 3000+ would be at
least a little faster.

I ran several benchmarks, but here are my PCMark04 scores just for the sake
of comparison:

P4 2.4 GHz (100-MHz system bus):
------------------------
CPU: 3408
Memory: 2553 (1 GB of PC2100 DDR266)
HDD: 1640 (WD 80-GB IDE)


Athlon XP 3000+ (166-MHz system bus):
------------------------------
CPU: 2825
Memory: 1620 (1 GB PC3200 DDR400)
HDD: 4690 (WD 80-GB SATA)


Both systems have an 80-GB Western Digital hard disk drive, but the hard
disk performance of the Athlon system is impressive, presumably because of
SATA support. (The hard disk in the Pentium 4 system is connected to a
Promise Ultra133 TX2 card.)

The motherboard in the Athlon system is an ABIT VA-20, and both systems are
running Win XP SP2. I've triple-checked the BIOS settings and everything
appears to be set correctly.

Is this performance typical for an Athlon XP 3000+? Is the VA-20 just a
crappy motherboard?

 

[Ed Cregger]

I've just put together an Athlon XP 3000+ system for a family member. I was
disappointed at the CPU and memory performance compared to my own Pentium 4
2.6-GHz (400-Mhz FSB) system. I thought that the Athlon XP 3000+ would be at
least a little faster.

I ran several benchmarks, but here are my PCMark04 scores just for the sake
of comparison:

P4 2.4 GHz (100-MHz system bus):
------------------------
CPU: 3408
Memory: 2553 (1 GB of PC2100 DDR266)
HDD: 1640 (WD 80-GB IDE)


Athlon XP 3000+ (166-MHz system bus):
------------------------------
CPU: 2825
Memory: 1620 (1 GB PC3200 DDR400)
HDD: 4690 (WD 80-GB SATA)


Both systems have an 80-GB Western Digital hard disk drive, but the hard
disk performance of the Athlon system is impressive, presumably because of
SATA support. (The hard disk in the Pentium 4 system is connected to a
Promise Ultra133 TX2 card.)

The motherboard in the Athlon system is an ABIT VA-20, and both systems are
running Win XP SP2. I've triple-checked the BIOS settings and everything
appears to be set correctly.

Is this performance typical for an Athlon XP 3000+? Is the VA-20 just a
crappy motherboard?

Now load both systems with the new Win 64 bit OS. Which is fastest now? <G>

I understand your frustration. I have a P4 2.8 MHz system and an AMD64 3200+
system. The P4 is faster in some areas and the AMD64 is faster in others.
But we both know which will run the new 64-bit OS and which won't. Look at
the bright side of the situation.

Ed Cregger

 

[BigJim]

64 bit wow I got to get that.

Now load both systems with the new Win 64 bit OS. Which is fastest now?
<G>

I understand your frustration. I have a P4 2.8 MHz system and an AMD64
3200+
system. The P4 is faster in some areas and the AMD64 is faster in others.
But we both know which will run the new 64-bit OS and which won't. Look at
the bright side of the situation.

Ed Cregger

 

[old jon]

Won`t DDR400 run at 200 ?. ..J

 

[sbb78247]

Now load both systems with the new Win 64 bit OS. Which is fastest
now? <G>

I understand your frustration. I have a P4 2.8 MHz system and an
AMD64 3200+ system. The P4 is faster in some areas and the AMD64 is
faster in others. But we both know which will run the new 64-bit OS
and which won't. Look at the bright side of the situation.

Ed Cregger

exactly how is a 64 bit OS going to help when both chips are 32 bit???? The
OP said Athlon XP3000+

<ed slaps forehead now DOH!>

 

[John Doe]

I've just put together an Athlon XP 3000+ system for a family
member. I was disappointed at the CPU and memory performance
compared to my own Pentium 4 2.6-GHz (400-Mhz FSB) system. I
thought that the Athlon XP 3000+ would be at least a little
faster.

I ran several benchmarks, but here are my PCMark04 scores just
for the sake of comparison:

P4 2.4 GHz (100-MHz system bus):
------------------------
CPU: 3408
Memory: 2553 (1 GB of PC2100 DDR266)
HDD: 1640 (WD 80-GB IDE)


Athlon XP 3000+ (166-MHz system bus):
------------------------------
CPU: 2825
Memory: 1620 (1 GB PC3200 DDR400)
HDD: 4690 (WD 80-GB SATA)


Both systems have an 80-GB Western Digital hard disk drive, but
the hard disk performance of the Athlon system is impressive,
presumably because of SATA support. (The hard disk in the
Pentium 4 system is connected to a Promise Ultra133 TX2 card.)

The motherboard in the Athlon system is an ABIT VA-20,

You should IMO list all of the hardware together, like this.

ABIT VA-20
Athlon XP 3000+
1GB PC3200 DDR400
WD 80-GB SATA

If your CPU uses a 166-MHz system bus, then you should set the
memory input/output speed at the same 166 MHz frequency (assuming
it runs fast as the CPU, which it does).

Try another testing program?

Good luck.




and both systems are

 

[Ed Cregger]

exactly how is a 64 bit OS going to help when both chips are 32 bit????
The
OP said Athlon XP3000+

<ed slaps forehead now DOH!>

Yep. Slapped the forehead...

Ed Cregger

 

[ancra]

I've just put together an Athlon XP 3000+ system for a family member. I was
disappointed at the CPU and memory performance compared to my own Pentium 4
2.6-GHz (400-Mhz FSB) system. I thought that the Athlon XP 3000+ would be at
least a little faster.

I ran several benchmarks, but here are my PCMark04 scores just for the sake
of comparison:

P4 2.4 GHz (100-MHz system bus):
------------------------
CPU: 3408
Memory: 2553 (1 GB of PC2100 DDR266)
HDD: 1640 (WD 80-GB IDE)


Athlon XP 3000+ (166-MHz system bus):
------------------------------
CPU: 2825
Memory: 1620 (1 GB PC3200 DDR400)
HDD: 4690 (WD 80-GB SATA)


Both systems have an 80-GB Western Digital hard disk drive, but the hard
disk performance of the Athlon system is impressive, presumably because of
SATA support. (The hard disk in the Pentium 4 system is connected to a
Promise Ultra133 TX2 card.)

The motherboard in the Athlon system is an ABIT VA-20, and both systems are
running Win XP SP2. I've triple-checked the BIOS settings and everything
appears to be set correctly.

Is this performance typical for an Athlon XP 3000+? Is the VA-20 just a
crappy motherboard?

PCMark is shamelessly flattering for P4s.

Amazingly, many popular benchmarks don't correlate well to reality.
There are various reasons for this. Each new generation of PCMark and
SYSMark for instance, is formulated to primarily focus on showing off
the improvements of the latest generation of (market leader) Intel
CPU. Whether this be increased FSB, SSE2, hyperthreading, or the
Prescotts new flavor of branch prediction.
They do a really rotten job comparing AMD to Intel Performance on real
world applications.

Try clocking your typical apps instead. Or 'Veritest Winstone
benchmarks'.
Another thing is that the A-XP architecture doesn't support SSE2
extensions. So software that employ that heavily, common for video
apps, will run better on the P4.

 

[sbb78247]

Yep. Slapped the forehead...

Ed Cregger

at least that was all!

 

[ChangeGuy]

should have gotten the athlon 64 3000 for socket 939 instead. I think it's
in the same price range and it's faster than the 32bit one

 

[mavy]

"> >I got this board as well running a XP2800 barton PC400 1Gig and found it to
be slow for some reason, sisoftware sandra shows it to be about the same as
a XP2000 with sdram !

 

[C R Briggs]

I've just put together an Athlon XP 3000+ system for a family member. I
was disappointed at the CPU and memory performance compared to my own
Pentium 4 2.6-GHz (400-Mhz FSB) system. I thought that the Athlon XP 3000+
would be at least a little faster.

I ran several benchmarks, but here are my PCMark04 scores just for the
sake of comparison:

P4 2.4 GHz (100-MHz system bus):
------------------------
CPU: 3408
Memory: 2553 (1 GB of PC2100 DDR266)
HDD: 1640 (WD 80-GB IDE)


Athlon XP 3000+ (166-MHz system bus):
------------------------------
CPU: 2825
Memory: 1620 (1 GB PC3200 DDR400)
HDD: 4690 (WD 80-GB SATA)


Both systems have an 80-GB Western Digital hard disk drive, but the hard
disk performance of the Athlon system is impressive, presumably because of
SATA support. (The hard disk in the Pentium 4 system is connected to a
Promise Ultra133 TX2 card.)

The motherboard in the Athlon system is an ABIT VA-20, and both systems
are running Win XP SP2. I've triple-checked the BIOS settings and
everything appears to be set correctly.

Is this performance typical for an Athlon XP 3000+? Is the VA-20 just a
crappy motherboard?

G,

My experience of this board (Abit VA-20) are very similar to yours - a slow
board.

On Christmas Eve my Athlon XP3000+, 1 GB PC2700 RAM, 2 x 80 GB PATA HDDs on
Soltek mobo stopped working. By Christmas Day I had diagnosed the mobo as
failed. On Boxing Day I got the VA-20 as it was the only socket A board
that I could find locally. I rebuilt the system and it seemed very slow
running my normal software, so I ran the "Aida" benchmark and it said
extremely low memory performance.

I subsequently had the Soltek repaired and "upgraded" an old K6-2 500 Mhz
system with the VA-20, an XP 2100+ that I had spare, 512 MB PC3200 RAM and
40 GB PATA HDD - and the VA-20 still gives very low RAM benchmarks.

As you say, I believe that "the VA-20 (is) just a crappy motherboard".

 

[mavy]

On Christmas Eve my Athlon XP3000+, 1 GB PC2700 RAM, 2 x 80 GB PATA HDDs on
Soltek mobo stopped working. By Christmas Day I had diagnosed the mobo as
failed. On Boxing Day I got the VA-20 as it was the only socket A board
that I could find locally. I rebuilt the system and it seemed very slow
running my normal software, so I ran the "Aida" benchmark and it said
extremely low memory performance.

I subsequently had the Soltek repaired and "upgraded" an old K6-2 500 Mhz
system with the VA-20, an XP 2100+ that I had spare, 512 MB PC3200 RAM and
40 GB PATA HDD - and the VA-20 still gives very low RAM benchmarks.

As you say, I believe that "the VA-20 (is) just a crappy motherboard".

Sandra says that this board is made by Elitegroup (ECS) no wonder if it is
true

 

[Conor]

Sandra says that this board is made by Elitegroup (ECS) no wonder if it is
true

Sandra is a pile of shit that spends more time guestimating whats in a
PC than actually having a match.

 

[mavy]

Sandra is a pile of shit that spends more time guestimating whats in a
PC than actually having a match.

http://www.ecs.com.tw/ECSWeb/Products/ProductsDetail.aspx?DetailID=427&MenuID=24&LanID=8

Does look identical so it does seem sandra is correct in this case so much
for buying Abit

 

[Fisher]

Sandra is a pile of shit that spends more time guestimating whats in a
PC than actually having a match.

Sandra? Who still uses that? Everest is the proggy to use now.

 

[mavy]

Sandra? Who still uses that? Everest is the proggy to use now.

I installed Everest and it too says "Field Value Motherboard Name vECS
KM400-M Deluxe / KM400-M2 / KM400A-M2 / V7-2" So ECS make boards for Abit

 

[Ruel Smith]

I've just put together an Athlon XP 3000+ system for a family member. I
was disappointed at the CPU and memory performance compared to my own
Pentium 4 2.6-GHz (400-Mhz FSB) system. I thought that the Athlon XP 3000+
would be at least a little faster.

I ran several benchmarks, but here are my PCMark04 scores just for the
sake of comparison:

P4 2.4 GHz (100-MHz system bus):
------------------------
CPU: 3408
Memory: 2553 (1 GB of PC2100 DDR266)
HDD: 1640 (WD 80-GB IDE)


Athlon XP 3000+ (166-MHz system bus):
------------------------------
CPU: 2825
Memory: 1620 (1 GB PC3200 DDR400)
HDD: 4690 (WD 80-GB SATA)


Both systems have an 80-GB Western Digital hard disk drive, but the hard
disk performance of the Athlon system is impressive, presumably because of
SATA support. (The hard disk in the Pentium 4 system is connected to a
Promise Ultra133 TX2 card.)

The motherboard in the Athlon system is an ABIT VA-20, and both systems
are running Win XP SP2. I've triple-checked the BIOS settings and
everything appears to be set correctly.

Is this performance typical for an Athlon XP 3000+? Is the VA-20 just a
crappy motherboard?

Well, I can't make a direct observation of my Athlon XP 2800+ vs. my P4 2.6
Northwood systems because one runs Linux and the other Windows XP. However,
I have a couple of things to say about this: First, one benchmark does not
tell the whole story. Honestly, I'm suspicious of benchmarks because
certain ones have been shown to be biased toward certain processors.
Second, each processor shines in different areas. AMD processors have shown
to be more effective than Intel processors for 3D gaming performance, but
P4's have shown to be faster during video encoding. Third, motherboard
chipsets make a difference. On Tom's Hardware CPU charts, Athlon 64
processors are fastest on Via KT800 chipsets. nForce 3 chipsets seem to
come in a little slower. This particular CPU chart does not have the newest
chipsets, but from what I gather, the nForce 4 chipset is supposedly faster
than the newest offering from Via. So, chipsets make a huge difference in
performance. Fourth, the motherboard you have with the Athlon XP has
onboard graphics, which I assume shares system memory, unlike a board with
an AGP card which has its own memory. This is bound to cause a bottleneck
in the memory, effectively slowing your system. Lastly, I'm not sure that
just installing Windows XP on the machine will have it optimized for the K7
architecture. In the past, I've always felt that Microsoft had an Intel
bias. That seems to be the opposite with the new 64 bit architectures.
However, unlike Linux where you can install or compile a kernel for your
processor and have a system optimized to perform best on it, I have no idea
what goes on when the Windows installer sets up the kernel during
installation and it could have a generic 386 kernel compiled for it. I'm
sure that OEM's have to tools to tweak them to get the best performance,
but a consumer does not, and just running the installation does not
guarantee you a system optimized the best it can be.

My 2800+ seems to be every bit as fast as my 2.6 P4, which has been
overclocked to 3.0. However, that's only perception. I also have a more
comparable setup, both using AGP graphics, and the same amount of memory.

You can compare processors on Tom's Hardware CPU charts, if you like, and
determine it what you're coming up with and what they did jive, and if you
need to look into something to get performance a little better.

 

[Ruel Smith]

I installed Everest and it too says "Field Value Motherboard Name vECS
KM400-M Deluxe / KM400-M2 / KM400A-M2 / V7-2" So ECS make boards for Abit

Possibly low volume boards, but I think Abit makes their own Fatal1ty
boards, and other high-end boards. It wouldn't surprise me that 2 OEM's
would use the same board by different names for low volume boards, much in
the same way Toyota made the Matrix and GM the Pontiac Vibe.

 

[Ruel Smith]

64 bit wow I got to get that.

Not until MS Windows XP 64 matures and gets apps and drivers in 64 bit...